T Nation

From an Angry Soldier

Date: 2007-04-10, 1:00PM PDT

[i]I’m having the worst damn week of my whole damn life so I’m going to write this while I’m pissed off enough to do it right.

I am SICK of all this bullshit people are writing about the Iraq war. I am abso-fucking-lutely sick to death of it. What the fuck do most of you know about it?

You watch it on TV and read the commentaries in the newspaper or Newsweek or whatever god damn yuppie news rag you subscribe to and think you’re all such fucking experts that you can scream at each other like five year old about whether you’re right or not.

Let me tell you something: unless you’ve been there, you don’t know a god damn thing about it. It you haven’t been shot at in that fucking hell hole, SHUT THE FUCK UP!

How do I dare say this to you moronic war supporters who are “Supporting our Troops” and waving the flag and all that happy horse shit? I’ll tell you why. I’m a Marine and I served my tour in Iraq. My husband, also a Marine, served several.

I left the service six months ago because I got pregnant while he was home on leave and three days ago I get a visit from two men in uniform who hand me a letter and tell me my husband died in that fucking festering sand-pit. He should have been home a month ago but they extended his tour and now he’s coming home in a box.

You fuckers and that god-damn lying sack of shit they call a president are the reason my husband will never see his baby and my kid will never meet his dad.

And you know what the most fucked up thing about this Iraq shit is? They don’t want us there. They’re not happy we came and they want us out NOW. We fucked up their lives even worse than they already were and they’re pissed off. We didn’t help them and we’re not helping them now. That’s what our soldiers are dying for.

Oh while I’m good and worked up, the government doesn’t even have the decency to help out the soldiers whos lives they ruined. If you really believe the military and the government had no idea the veterans’ hospitals were so fucked up, you are a god-damn retard. They don’t care about us. We’re disposable.

We’re numbers on a page and they’d rather forget we exist so they don’t have to be reminded about the families and lives they ruined while they’re sipping their cocktails at another fund raiser dinner.

If they were really concerned about supporting the troops, they’d bring them home so their families wouldn’t have to cry at a graveside and explain to their children why mommy or daddy isn’t coming home. Because you can’t explain it.

We’re not fighting for our country, we’re not fighting for the good of Iraq’s people, we’re fighting for Bush’s personal agenda. Patriotism my ass. You know what? My dad served in Vietnam and NOTHING HAS CHANGED.

So I’m pissed. I’m beyond pissed. And I’m going to go to my husband funeral and recieve that flag and hang it up on the wall for my baby to see when he’s older. But I’m not going to tell him that his father died for the stupidty of the American government.

I’m going to tell him that his father was a hero and the best man I ever met and that he loved his country enough to die for it, because that’s all true and nothing will be solved by telling my son that his father was sent to die by people who didn’t care about him at all.

Fuck you, war supporters, George W. Bush, and all the god damn mother fuckers who made the war possible. I hope you burn in hell. [/i]

http://www.craigslist.org/about/best/sfo/309485032.html

I can attest to many soldiers being opposed to this war but I think there are just as many in favor of it. It’s interesting to see somebody’s perspective but I don’t agree with this Marine thinking they she has a superior right to voice her opinion because she’s been to Iraq. Other people in this country are doing things equally and sometimes even more important here in the U.S. and they still have the right to voice their opinions on the War.

Reminds me of the inbred retard in the movie Deliverance, the one with the banjo. Stupid fuck.

while i can never put my myslef inn your shoes i wont try too but most people who say they support our troops are doing just that. supporting the troops. not the war. not bush. the troops. as a normal person i oppose the war but support the troops losing their lives and hope they are safe.so please dont think that everyone is against you b/c we pray for you and for the fucker that calls himself the president to suck up his damn pride and pull out of iraq

We’ll be seeing this on snopes soon enough. In the highly off chance she is genuine, then she needs to show a little bearing. Behavior such as hers dishonors her husband. I would expect better from a former Marine.

Actually, I pulled up another window and did a little research. There were only 2 KIA within 2 weeks of 10 April, when this was written. Only one of which was by hostile fire. That happened a full 8 days before this was written. It does NOT take 8 days to get word to a wife about a KIA. I lost one of my best friends there and I found out just a day later. This letter is a hoax. Some pissed off anti-war San Franciscan figuring that it was okay to lie to get her point across. No honor.

mike

[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
This letter is a hoax. Some pissed off anti-war San Franciscan figuring that it was okay to lie to get her point across. No honor. [/quote]

Might be. What’s sure is that before this is either confirmed or denied, a little respect for the gal’s pain should be in order.

I’ll temper my language if I were you - in case she turns out to be legit’.

[quote]lixy wrote:
Mikeyali wrote:
This letter is a hoax. Some pissed off anti-war San Franciscan figuring that it was okay to lie to get her point across. No honor.

Might be. What’s sure is that before this is either confirmed or denied, a little respect for the gal’s pain should be in order.

I’ll temper my language if I were you - in case she turns out to be legit’.[/quote]

I’ve outlined just why I don’t think this is legit. Again though, even if it were legit, shame on her. She dishonors her husband’s service by losing her bearing and making remarks and accusations when she admits she isn’t in full control of herself. Just because she MIGHT be an Iraq vet does not give her license to speak with authority about the whole war. Today’s vet is held on far too high a pedestal.

Us vets are treated like our shit doesn’t stink only because America knows how bad they treated her 'Nam vets. A great many vets have taken that much too far and think themselves and their opinions above reproach.

The bottom line for me is that she uses her husband as a tool to further HER beliefs. We do not know what the husband’s beliefs were, but she uses him to advance her agenda. It is dishonest and dishonorable. I have been to multiple events where my friend’s name was used to further an anti-war agenda. I go to these events to remove his name from a balloon or a pair of boots. He would not approve of being used to further an agenda in which he doesn’t believe. This of course has never stopped the anti-war crowd from attempting to profit from his death. Cindy Sheehan did it, and so is this woman.

mike

Secondly:

“I left the service six months ago because I got pregnant while he was home on leave and three days ago I get a visit from two men in uniform who hand me a letter and tell me my husband died in that fucking festering sand-pit. He should have been home a month ago but they extended his tour and now he’s coming home in a box.”

Marines don’t get to just come home on leave during their tours. The army does. This is because Marines are serving 6 month tours. This hasn’t changed since the onset of the war. The only people coming home are due to deaths in the family, ect. They don’t even get to come home when their wives squirt a kid out.

Anyone whose tour was “extended” only got extended by one of two ways: either they got help for a month due to rotational issues or they volunteered for an extension. The Corps doesn’t fuck it’s men quite as bad as the army does. This woman is bullshit.

mike

[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
She dishonors her husband’s service by losing her bearing and making remarks and accusations when she admits she isn’t in full control of herself. [/quote]

Really, how dare she show her human side and become emotional about the wasted life of her husband–and baby-daddy. Do you really believe this tripe that you have written?

“Sergeant, permission to lose my bearing and grieve for my husband?”

[quote]
Just because she MIGHT be an Iraq vet does not give her license to speak with authority about the whole war. [/quote]

Who gets to speak with authority about Iraq–the politicians who only have to go to funerals of their constituents and not their loved ones?

Even if this letter is not legit it represents a growing sentiment. As a former Marine I am disgusted with this war and the loss of human life and though I cannot speak with any authority know without a doubt that all Americans have been bamboozled.

Well, and also…

I left the service six months ago because I got pregnant while he was home on leave

If she was in as well, why is it phrased that way? Wouldn’t they both have been on leave?

Additionally, two active duty military personnel have no business engaging in unprotected sex, married or not, because pregnancy under those conditions is irresponsible. The fatherlessness of that child is a result of the actions of its mother and father, not the American War Machine, whose motto is, if I’m not mistaken, “Make war, not love.”

I am not, however, unsympathetic. If she’s legitimate, she has a difficult and painful row to hoe, regardless of whose responsibility was what.

[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
This of course has never stopped the anti-war crowd from attempting to profit from his death. [/quote]

I don’t really get this part. Do you think that the anti-war crowd have anything to “profit” from?

Personally, I really really don’t think Cindy or this gal are “profiting” from anything if the war stops. They already lost their loved ones and no amount of shouting will bring them back. All they want at this stage, IMHO, is to protect others from going through what they endured.

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
Additionally, two active duty military personnel have no business engaging in unprotected sex, married or not, because pregnancy under those conditions is irresponsible. [/quote]

Agreed. But condoms break…

I’ll quote you on that one.

I’m not done.

You only have two choices here as to who this could be. It could be Daniel R. Olsen who died on 4/02/07 through combat wounds or Miguel Marcial III, who died on 4/01/07 through non-hostile actions.

Daniel R. Olson wasn’t married.

http://www.legacy.com/TwinCities/Obituaries.asp?Page=LifeStory&PersonId=87085712

Miguel Marcial III also wasn’t married and had also only been in country a month.

The next Marine to die was on 3/21/07, long before this post would have been written.

Now, to hit the main points:

Lifticus, had this been real, which it is obviously not, she would be absolutely entitled to grieve. You’re a fellow Marine man, you know that lashing out like that would have been irresponsible. Would you want your wife to behave like that if you died in combat?

Secondly, and here’s my big beef that everyone seems to be missing. This behavior is selfish. She is not expressing her opinion. If you want to have a beef with the war, argue with logic, not feelings. There are plenty of valid anti-war arguments. She is using her husband’s death as a vehicle to push her agenda. We don’t know how HE felt, but he’s being used as a tool. She’s saying that her opinion is the only one that matters because her husband is dead. She does not say that he believed anything, yet she is using him to further her own feelings. Grieve, God knows I did and still do. I was sunk in a 6 month depression before I got my shit back together. But if you’re going to grieve, do so responsibly. She didn’t.

Lixy, the anti-war crowd profits by pushing their agenda. How many times must I say this? It pains me to defend Michael Moore, but if you want to use the military to push your agenda, do it like he did with his book and use their words. For the most part, the anti-war crowd is using the dead to push their agenda and there’s not a damn thing the dead can do about it…because they are dead. Some would certainly have been anti-war, but many (and I would venture more) would not approve of their death being used to further causes they don’t agree with. It would be like if I were shot tomorrow by some thug and the local gun grabber put my face on a poster and pushed a gun ban in my name. It’s the SAME THING.

mike

BESIDES, THE BITCH IS A FRAUD!!!

[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
I’m not done.

You only have two choices here as to who this could be. It could be Daniel R. Olsen who died on 4/02/07 through combat wounds or Miguel Marcial III, who died on 4/01/07 through non-hostile actions.

Daniel R. Olson wasn’t married.

http://www.legacy.com/TwinCities/Obituaries.asp?Page=LifeStory&PersonId=87085712

Miguel Marcial III also wasn’t married and had also only been in country a month.

The next Marine to die was on 3/21/07, long before this post would have been written.

Now, to hit the main points:

Lifticus, had this been real, which it is obviously not, she would be absolutely entitled to grieve. You’re a fellow Marine man, you know that lashing out like that would have been irresponsible. Would you want your wife to behave like that if you died in combat?

Secondly, and here’s my big beef that everyone seems to be missing. This behavior is selfish. She is not expressing her opinion. If you want to have a beef with the war, argue with logic, not feelings. There are plenty of valid anti-war arguments. She is using her husband’s death as a vehicle to push her agenda. We don’t know how HE felt, but he’s being used as a tool. She’s saying that her opinion is the only one that matters because her husband is dead. She does not say that he believed anything, yet she is using him to further her own feelings. Grieve, God knows I did and still do. I was sunk in a 6 month depression before I got my shit back together. But if you’re going to grieve, do so responsibly. She didn’t.

Lixy, the anti-war crowd profits by pushing their agenda. How many times must I say this? It pains me to defend Michael Moore, but if you want to use the military to push your agenda, do it like he did with his book and use their words. For the most part, the anti-war crowd is using the dead to push their agenda and there’s not a damn thing the dead can do about it…because they are dead. Some would certainly have been anti-war, but many (and I would venture more) would not approve of their death being used to further causes they don’t agree with. It would be like if I were shot tomorrow by some thug and the local gun grabber put my face on a poster and pushed a gun ban in my name. It’s the SAME THING.

mike

BESIDES, THE BITCH IS A FRAUD!!!
[/quote]

case closed.

[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
Lixy, the anti-war crowd profits by pushing their agenda. How many times must I say this? [/quote]

Don’t use the term “profit” then. It’s got a material connotation attached to it.

The war crowd profits. The anti-war crowd’s agenda has nothing remotely “profitable” about it.

Can we agree on that?

I would reserve judgement on this until I knew if it was real or not.

Although I agree with her political sentiments, I disagree that the only person who can talk about a war is a veteran. They have first hand knowledge, of course, but sometimes being in the thick of things can skew one’s view.

[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
I’m not done.

You only have two choices here as to who this could be. It could be Daniel R. Olsen who died on 4/02/07 through combat wounds or Miguel Marcial III, who died on 4/01/07 through non-hostile actions.

Daniel R. Olson wasn’t married.

http://www.legacy.com/TwinCities/Obituaries.asp?Page=LifeStory&PersonId=87085712

Miguel Marcial III also wasn’t married and had also only been in country a month.

The next Marine to die was on 3/21/07, long before this post would have been written.

Now, to hit the main points:

Lifticus, had this been real, which it is obviously not, she would be absolutely entitled to grieve. You’re a fellow Marine man, you know that lashing out like that would have been irresponsible. Would you want your wife to behave like that if you died in combat?
[/quote]
Hell yes, I would want my wife to scream from the rooftops. I would want her to grieve the way she wants; and frankly I don’t believe in this macho USMC image. Its all a lie. I have seem Marines break down into tears for lesser things. What is irresponsible about feeling loss? She isn’t in the corp anymore. She isn’t taking orders. What is the problem? Is it that it makes the corp look bad? I don’t think it does. It makes it look real and human.

[quote]
Secondly, and here’s my big beef that everyone seems to be missing. This behavior is selfish. She is not expressing her opinion. [/quote]

This is a real stretch even for a big, badass Marine. She is expressing an opinion. She is entitled to selfish behavior even though I don’t look at it as such. Its called freedom of expression and being told to stifle it would only make me want to rebel even more.

[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
Actually, I pulled up another window and did a little research. There were only 2 KIA within 2 weeks of 10 April, when this was written.[/quote]

April 10, 2007 is when the letter was posted…when was it written? This could have been copied onto Craig’s list from another source. This letter could also have been sitting around waiting to be posted for 6 months. There is no substantial proof of fraud and you are just reacting emotionally to the content because you disagree with it. Be skeptical but also be rational.

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
Well, and also…

I left the service six months ago because I got pregnant while he was home on leave

If she was in as well, why is it phrased that way? Wouldn’t they both have been on leave?
[/quote]
No, not necessarily, she was, more than likely, non-deployable while her husband was gone which means she would have been stateside. What Mikey said about the USMC is correct about some deployments but this war is much different than most “floats”. Both of my friends were gone for over 9 months deplyed with II MEF Intel and didn’t take a boat which is how many Marines deploy via Marine Expeditionary Units.

We have no idea if they had unprotected sex or not. Besides that it is none of Uncle Sam’s business.

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Mikeyali wrote:
I’m not done.

You only have two choices here as to who this could be. It could be Daniel R. Olsen who died on 4/02/07 through combat wounds or Miguel Marcial III, who died on 4/01/07 through non-hostile actions.

Daniel R. Olson wasn’t married.

http://www.legacy.com/TwinCities/Obituaries.asp?Page=LifeStory&PersonId=87085712

Miguel Marcial III also wasn’t married and had also only been in country a month.

The next Marine to die was on 3/21/07, long before this post would have been written.

Now, to hit the main points:

Lifticus, had this been real, which it is obviously not, she would be absolutely entitled to grieve. You’re a fellow Marine man, you know that lashing out like that would have been irresponsible. Would you want your wife to behave like that if you died in combat?

Hell yes, I would want my wife to scream from the rooftops. I would want her to grieve the way she wants; and frankly I don’t believe in this macho USMC image. Its all a lie. I have seem Marines break down into tears for lesser things. What is irresponsible about feeling loss? She isn’t in the corp anymore. She isn’t taking orders. What is the problem? Is it that it makes the corp look bad? I don’t think it does. It makes it look real and human.

Secondly, and here’s my big beef that everyone seems to be missing. This behavior is selfish. She is not expressing her opinion.

This is a real stretch even for a big, badass Marine. She is expressing an opinion. She is entitled to selfish behavior even though I don’t look at it as such. Its called freedom of expression and being told to stifle it would only make me want to rebel even more.

[/quote]

You’re still missing my main point. If she wants to get emotional and scream from the rooftops, then fine. She certainly has the right. But it is inappropriate to use the dead as a vehicle to push HER anger, even if it is her own husband.

mike